Dean Smith did business as Deans's Appliance. For years, he bought appliances direct from General Electric. Deans's Appliance was sold to Smitty's Appliance, Inc. and Smitty hired Dean as manager, but General Electric did not know of the ownership change. Dean ordered a truckload of appliances from General Electric, as he had done many times. But when the invoice came due, Smitty refused to pay, claiming the order was a mistake, and it had not authorized Dean to make the order. General Electric sued both Smitty and Dean personally. What is the most likely outcome

The court gave judgement against Dean because of fraud.

Explanation:

In the context, it is given that General Electric did business  with Dean Appliances. Now Deans's Appliance was sold to Smitty's Appliance, Inc., to which Geneal Electric was unaware.

Smitty hired Dean as his manager and now Dean ordered appliances from General Electric as earlier he had done. But Smitty refused to pay when the invoice came due saying that Smitty did not authorized Dean to make those orders.

General Electric sues Smitty and Dean personally. The most likely outcome of the lawsuit is that the court punishes Dean for breaching and doing fraud with both Smitty and General Electric. Dean is found guilty.

answer; the above statement/question is ( true);